|
22 Jun 23 - 08:25 AM (#4175233) Subject: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome Long but very interesting read in the New Yorker magazine. I enjoyed it anyway! |
|
23 Jun 23 - 10:38 AM (#4175292) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: GUEST,keberoxu After reading the article, I see Ed Sheeran as the latest in a series of many such songwriters; what he may have done, others have been doing for generations before him. Is there really a recording of Ed Sheeran singing "The Parting Glass"? I heard something to that effect. |
|
23 Jun 23 - 10:53 AM (#4175296) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome There is and one of him singing The Wild Mountain Thyme. I'm out at the mo but when if you don't find them on YouTube I shall post links when I get home |
|
23 Jun 23 - 12:46 PM (#4175301) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome Back home now - It's easier on a desktop The parting glass The wild mountain thyme Of course there are those who walk amongst us that will insist that he can never sing folk songs because he was not born in 1870... :-D |
|
25 Jun 23 - 04:28 AM (#4175420) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: GUEST Of course there are those who walk amongst us that will insist that he can never sing folk songs because he was not born in 1870..." I do not think anyone on this forum has ever suggested such a thing |
|
25 Jun 23 - 04:54 AM (#4175421) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Backwoodsman I think there are some un-named GUESTS who don’t ‘get’ jokes, Dick. |
|
25 Jun 23 - 07:40 AM (#4175430) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome I think you're right John! Apart from about my name :-D |
|
25 Jun 23 - 07:51 AM (#4175432) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Backwoodsman LOL Dave! :-D ;-) |
|
25 Jun 23 - 07:52 AM (#4175434) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Backwoodsman But I’m sure we were both thinking of the same bloke! ;-) |
|
25 Jun 23 - 08:03 AM (#4175436) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome :-D |
|
25 Jun 23 - 08:02 PM (#4175491) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: GUEST,Guest Just attended a singing weekend in Yorkshire with never an instrument in sight - although there were some exceptional musicians there. Two hundred plus songs sung over two and a half days with only a couple of variants (duplicates?). Mostly traditional English, Irish and Scottish with some excellent more moden stuff in the idiom. Also just listened to the couple of tracks by Ed Sheeran and they would certainly have been welcome at the gathering - He probably applied too late as the event usually sells out within 24 hours. (Tongue in cheek!!) And no I am not being condescending. He is obviously a young man with a bucket load of talent and a real feel for quality music of whatever genre. |
|
25 Jun 23 - 10:59 PM (#4175499) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Pappy Fiddle I have a question. It might seem dense or something, but I've dug around, even asked a lawyer, and still haven't got the answer. I seem to remember that Bill Clinton signed into law the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, which increased the length of a copyright from 21 to 42 years. And yet I can't find this number anywhere other than my memory. In 2008, Paul McCartney started performing his own song, "And I Love Her" in concerts, first released in 1966. I imagine his lawyers told him he couldn't sing it before that for money. Because the copyright belonged to the Beatles' record company, who sold it to someone, who sold it to someone else, and eventually it wound up in Sony's portifolio, or Michael Jackson's. Anyway, I surmise that since 42 years after 1966 is 2008, the copyright had expired. Is this accurate? |
|
26 Jun 23 - 02:25 AM (#4175505) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: GUEST,RJM if you are making a joke, it might be a god idea to put an IMAGE, Since there is no body language with e mails. Personally i think he sings the parting glass well |
|
26 Jun 23 - 03:35 AM (#4175509) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome Was that the Masham do Guest, Guest? |
|
26 Jun 23 - 04:46 AM (#4175512) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome BTW, Dick. Do you mean like this? ...because he was not born in 1870... :-D Which is exactly what I posted. Or by image and email do you mean something different to emoticon and post? |
|
26 Jun 23 - 05:12 AM (#4175514) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Backwoodsman Do emojis and emoticons work on Mudcat nowadays? Many years ago they did, but then I think there was some kind of software update or summat, which caused them not to work any longer. Let’s see - here’s a smiley emoji from my iPad KB… ?? Looks fine on ‘Preview’, let’s see what happens when I post it… |
|
26 Jun 23 - 05:14 AM (#4175515) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Backwoodsman As I thought - I’m guessing that the ‘Cats HTML can’t recognise the emoji, so it posts a double-query. |
|
26 Jun 23 - 05:38 AM (#4175520) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: GUEST He not only sings it well,but he has popularised the song without adding anything gimmicky. the accompaniment is ok |
|
26 Jun 23 - 05:39 AM (#4175522) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Jon Freeman 😀 It's not the HTML. Mudcat's database only supports a limited character set, perhaps latin-1, and characters entered that are not in that set get lost. |
|
26 Jun 23 - 05:41 AM (#4175523) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome I just use plain character emoticons rather than emojis anyway |
|
26 Jun 23 - 05:50 AM (#4175524) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome Quick rundown of the main ones I use for those who do not understand them :-) Smiling :-D Laughing :-( Sad ;-) Winking :-\ Confused There are many more so I suggest that anyone wanting to use plain text emoticons (as oposed to pictorial emojis) does a search. |
|
26 Jun 23 - 07:22 AM (#4175528) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Backwoodsman I’m good with the ones you’ve listed, Dave - they’re pretty universal, and I’d expect anyone and everyone to understand them. |
|
26 Jun 23 - 08:36 AM (#4175533) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome I'm sure there are those who say they don't! |
|
26 Jun 23 - 11:24 AM (#4175548) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Backwoodsman Aaaaahh-yup! They walk among us! ;-) |
|
26 Jun 23 - 03:03 PM (#4175568) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: GUEST,Guest from above I don't do jimijons or whatever and have no desire to, thank you. I'm perfectly happy to stick to my main language - English (UK). If you have trouble with either hyperbole or irony so be it. It was not damp praise I was applying but a genuine acknowledgement of the young man's talents. I agree that the simple presentation of well known folk song by a performer of Ed's public stature does lift the awareness of that public to an alternative music form the media, for a great part, ignores or presents inappropriately. |
|
27 Jun 23 - 03:12 AM (#4175602) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: GUEST,RJM Good post, Guest from above |
|
27 Jun 23 - 07:41 AM (#4175625) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: GUEST,Guest from above It occurs to me that if Ed were to make a decent fist of The Wexford Carol, perhaps with Cathal McConnell, he could have Christmas Number 1! Cathal, has in most people's opinion, recorded the definitive version of the song. You read it first here! |
|
27 Jun 23 - 07:58 AM (#4175628) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome He would be hard pushed to top the version by Alison Krauss and Yo-Yo Ma :-D |
|
27 Jun 23 - 10:53 AM (#4175640) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: GUEST,Guest from above Dave - much as I admire Alison Krauss I was thinking of what might best further our particular cause - how selfish of me! |
|
27 Jun 23 - 10:57 AM (#4175641) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: gillymor Anyone tried the Sheeran guitars that Lowden are producing and ES is promoting? Very affordable but how do they sound and play? |
|
27 Jun 23 - 11:03 AM (#4175643) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Backwoodsman They are not 'Lowdens but cheaper'. Not even in the same league as 'real' Lowdens, and not a patch on, for instance, the Taylor GS Mini (and I say that as a Lowden-lover and owner who has no particular affection for Taylor guitars). Of course IMHO, and YMMV. |
|
27 Jun 23 - 11:16 AM (#4175644) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome What is "our particular cause", Guest from above? I started the thread because I found the article interesting and because people who enjoy music may also be interested in the ramifications of this particular copyright case. There was no particular agenda and I certainly had no intention of what might best further whatever cause you had in mind! |
|
27 Jun 23 - 11:46 AM (#4175652) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: keberoxu I suppose he means the cause of traditional music? |
|
27 Jun 23 - 11:54 AM (#4175653) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: GUEST,Guest from above Indeed keberoxu |
|
27 Jun 23 - 11:59 AM (#4175655) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome If you would like a thread furthering the "cause" of traditional music then please feel free to start one. This one is about a copyright issue and about as far from traditional music as you can get! |
|
27 Jun 23 - 12:06 PM (#4175657) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome Your name doesn't happen to be WalkAboutzverse does it, Guest from above? |
|
27 Jun 23 - 12:21 PM (#4175659) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: gillymor So have you played a Sheeran, BW? I've owned a couple of Lowdens and still have my L-27 which I'll never part with but I'm curious about these guitars as I've played an Asian-built Eastman that A-B'ed very favorably with my Custom Shop Martin. Again, anyone played one? |
|
27 Jun 23 - 12:36 PM (#4175661) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Backwoodsman Yes, played a couple (I forget the model designations). Not for me. FWIW, I’ve owned four Lowdens, still own one, an F-23, which is my favourite of the ones I’ve owned. |
|
27 Jun 23 - 12:41 PM (#4175663) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: gillymor Thanks, I'm looking around for a beach and travel guitar that sounds decent. |
|
27 Jun 23 - 03:19 PM (#4175668) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: GUEST,Guest from above Not any of the guesses by the way. Dave if you think copyright does not cause problems within the traditional music world - try telling the PRS it is nothing to do with them. I am now signing off - bye! |
|
27 Jun 23 - 03:35 PM (#4175672) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome PRS collect money for music in copyright. Traditional music is not in copyright. Ne'er the twain... |
|
02 May 24 - 03:57 PM (#4201937) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: DaveRo A piece in the NYT about the Sheeran-Gaye copyright case, and US song copyright: What Is a Song? Is it simply the music flowing out of your earphones? According to the law, the answer is a bit more complicated. |
|
06 May 24 - 08:17 AM (#4202134) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome That is interesting, Dave. Thanks. |
|
06 May 24 - 08:56 AM (#4202136) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Raggytash One could argue that folk music, to most people, is seen as elderly people singing out of key with untuned instruments. One could also argue that Ed Sheeran has introduced more people to folk music by covering these songs than any one of do in a lifetime. For my money ........... you keep on singing them Ed! |
|
06 May 24 - 11:41 AM (#4202148) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Backwoodsman And I’m with you, Raggy! |
|
06 May 24 - 12:02 PM (#4202152) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome There are those who would tell you that it is attitudes like that that have ruined folk clubs. When it was "elderly people singing out of key with untuned instruments" there were packed folk clubs on every street corner. Sometimes twice a night. Now folk clubs are all Ed Sheeran wannabees singing pop songs. Eeeeeh, life were grand in t'olden days and kids nowadays have no respect :-D:-D:-D |
|
06 May 24 - 12:52 PM (#4202158) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Backwoodsman The folk and acoustic music clubs I go to are still mostly “Elderly people”, although the tendency to play untuned instruments largely faded away with the introduction, and ready availability, of digital tuners - having tin ears is no longer an acceptable excuse for an out-of-tune instrument. And the youngsters are mostly to be found at the amplified Open-Mics, reading their pop-songs’ lyrics from their Smart-phones, and playing far better than many of us old-timers have ever been capable of. Not saying this is indicative of the general situation, but it’s certainly my experience in my corner of the Backwoods. And - confession time now - I’ve been known to occasionally bang out Smokey’s ‘Tracks of My Tears’, Ricky Ross’s ‘Dignity’, and several other songs of their ilk. I feel no shame. ;-) :-) |
|
06 May 24 - 01:01 PM (#4202160) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Dave the Gnome Tsk, tsk... :-D |
|
06 May 24 - 10:43 PM (#4202190) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Backwoodsman If ‘TOMT’ is good enough for Chris & Kelly While, it’s plenty good enough for me! ;-) :-) Chris & Kellie While at The Ram Club |
|
06 May 24 - 10:46 PM (#4202191) Subject: RE: The case for and against Ed Sheeran From: Backwoodsman …and one of those Kellys/Kellies is spelled wrong! Oh for a facility to edit posts post-posting! :-) |